46. No, Palin's records were NOT released. Only a two page letter. See below

Edited on Thu Apr-14-11 08:49 PM by Tx4obama

SNIP

The McCain/Palin camp has released Governor Palin's medical records. Well, that's what they are calling a two page letter from Sarah Palin's doctor... yep, that's it.

Read it for yourself. Does she think this is releasing your medical records? That's like saying a book report is the same as the book. The letter was written by a friend and doctor of Governor Palin. The 48-year-old doctor, Cathy Baldwin-Johnson was nominated by the Alaska Chapter of AAFP, which had presented her with the Alaska Family Physician of the Year award for 2001." Letters of recommendation came from a variety of people, including the mayor of Wasilla and a commissioner for the state of Alaska."

of twins, I know what a 9 month pregnant woman looks like - I've seen the photos of Palin in TX right before she insisted on flying back to Alaska to give birth - and she was not pregnant. I'm using my eyes on the birth certificate - which I've seen. AND Palin's pregnancy - which does not exist in any photos. While she was governor. No photos of a pregnant Palin - who had her picture taken virtually every day. How does that happen? So...I'm going with pure observation here.

with the birth of their supposed child - I think that is a far greater issue than the unquestionable birthplace of President Obama.

It could be as simple as - Trig isn't her kid and it's a huge lie to cover up her daughter's premarital sex.

Or - even worse in some ways - she showed a complete and utter disregard for the health and safety of the baby she was carrying. Was she deliberately hoping this Down's Syndrome baby would - not be a problem - by flying thousands of mile, bypassing very good hospitals, and going to a local yokel clinic not suited for a high risk birth?

16. There is a huge difference between the Palin LIE and the Obama Truth

President Obama was born in Hawaii and has released his bc.

On the other hand there is NO proof that Palin was ever pregnant.And how do you explain the photos taken by the Alaska media of her just weeks before her alleged birth and she has a flat tummy.And how about the photo that was taken with the 'square' pillow under her shirt?And how come not even one person at work could tell she was pregnant two months before the alleged birth?

Precisely. Because Palin has zero history of being disingenuous, petulant or misleading-- to the public or her own co-workers; and there's no reason for anyone to doubt the veracity of any of her statements.

24. exactly--*if* this is true, Palin came up with a cover story a high-school girl would have tried

Her unwillingness to admit unpleasant and embarrassing facts to her constituents says a lot about her insecurity and tendency to make excuses. It's like the way she bailed halfway through her term instead of sticking to her responsibilities like a grown-up.

Also, *if* this pregnancy story is true, Palin's lie originated with her. The birther theories did not originate with Obama. So I agree--there's a big difference. They may have the same relevance--none--at this point, since her star seems to be fading and Obama is in the White House. But I'm with you--there is a big difference between 1) wanting to examine the very real possibility that Palin tells fanciful stories when faced with an unpleasant reality and 2) making up pathetic and easily disproven crap about Obama's place of birth.

The birther bullshit with Obama is rooted in racism. He's black, he's different, and therefore we have to prove that not only is he not like us, but he's illegitimate. The cold hard fact of the birther movement is that it NEVER would have gained traction with a president who could pass for white.

The Palin story is an expose (where's the accented e when you need it...) of hypocrisy. The Palins, and all those who rabidly follow them, consider themselves to be members of the morally superior family values crowd. These are the people who champion the cause for abstinence only sexual education and revocation of women's rights. If the story is true, it shows them as the biggest hypocrites to be found on the current political stage.

No one is questioning Sarah's legitimacy to be President, and no one is interested in these rumors simply because of her skin tone.

We were talking about the conspiracy theories and their equivalence, not actual evidence. The conspiracy theories are not equivalent, for several reasons, and one of the main reasons is the way they started.

What if they had looked deeper into Bush's past, the blowing up of small animals as a child, the hazing and branding college students bums, the military cover ups and on and on? They all got waved off, no one wanted to be bothered. One day we might be going, "WTF happened, how the hell did she.....?"

of a woman's stomach to see whether she is lying about being pregnant and scrutinizing pictures of a teenage girl's breast to see if there is "leakage," I'd say there's some level of sexism (or at least creepiness) about the whole thing.

and I actually think the story might be true. But I'm not going to look for evidence that way.

We have a long history, however, of people doing exactly what the Palins are being accused of... hiding a young person's pregnancy and claiming that the grandmother is the mother. If this is true (and I'm not saying it is but I'm not dismissing the possibility either), what it demonstrates is the danger the GOP in its current form represents for the U.S.: a reversal of social progress, moving us back to those "simpler times" when people had the very sexist attitude of not talking about sex, not educating about sex or encouraging safe sex, then hiding the "shameful" natural consequence of these actions, accidental pregnancies. This extreme sexism leads to the denial of one of the most basic human rights, the right to identity.

Conspiracy theories are a stupid waste of time because we have real issues of poverty, hunger, health care, needless wars, economy-raping corporate thieves and voting "irregularities" that should be so much more important than what did or didn't happen in Sarah Palin's vagina.

-Like tearful confession, Jimmy Swaggart style, proven true- that it wouldn't destroy her politically? I'm not weighing in on the merits of the claims one way or the other, but your conclusion that this would be no big deal seems exceedingly unlikely.

58. I think it looks bad that a professor has written an academic study proving Trig is Palin's Grandson

And yes, it is probably true, but does it matter? Really?

Palin's fans will still love her, most Republicans will work around her and most people hate her. Knowing she lied about her kid won't change any of that. If she rises to power, it will be without the consent of the people, and this will make no difference.

DNA testing is proof (though I don't know if it would work in this case). The Palin story evidence is circumstantial, and probably wishful. The 20-hour Flight to Egypt... sorry, Alaska... after her water broke is surely a strong indicator of... something, although not by itself proof for a specific hypothesis. As for the pictures, these usually say a lot less than people think.

I used to think poorly of Republicans for some of their widely held beliefs--the ideas that cutting taxes raises revenues, that evolution is false, that climate change science is some giant liberal hoax, that Bill and Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster, that Obama was born in Kenya.

Ha ha, I used to think. The good thing about Democrats is that we're reality-based. We don't believe things just because we want them to be true. And then this things keeps coming back.

is a defenseless child. I have no reason to harm him nor do I find it necessary to know who his birth mother is. I detest Palin...and there are many reasons to despise her and her politics...however, I'm not going to attempt to do it this way.

If Sarah Palin came out tomorrow and admitted to this hoax, that would be fine with you? I'm not saying it's true, but I must say, IF it were true, I don't see how anyone could be so cavalier about a lie of that magnitude as you would seem to be.

Do I honestly think that he is Palin's child? No. There seems to be ample proof that he isn't her biological child. BUT, the matter of the birth of Trig is not one of national importance...and throughout history there are MANY parents out there who have done the same thing she has done. Is it REALLY protecting Bristol? In the long run, I don't think so...especially since Bristol since has had another child.

It would be of GREAT concern if it were found out that Todd was found out to be the father and Bristol the mother AND that Palin covered up the incest. TO me, that is a more plausible story than anything that I have heard and the fact that the child was born with Down's could support that. THAT would be the only reason that any of this would really be any of our business.

The two stories look the same because they're both used by partisans in the depoliticized "politics of personal destruction," and in both cases those who are promoting the stories pursue the details with a kind of disturbing pathology. Also, both stories initially sound outlandish. However, "looking the same" doesn't mean that if one is false, the other one must also be.

The birth certificate stuff is false, besides being motivated by racist myth (not white therefore not really American) and furthermore: who cares? Seriously. Because it would have no impact on what he does in office if he was born in Kenya, any more than it mattered that McCain actually WAS born in Panama. (It's just so weird how the Republicans are always doing projection.)

The Trig story would also have no impact on what she does in office (she'd be just as bad). If it were true, it actually wouldn't be that unusual within the Christianist milieu. And it would put the lie to her family values nonsense, but of course a million other things she's done already did that.

Anyway, I don't imagine it coincidental that Palin endorsed birtherism and then a week later got slapped with this. There must not be a direct connection given the short time-frame (i.e., the new paper is not a direct retaliation) but there's a justice in it.

68. Amusing to watch people become that which they have contempt for?...

You mean like the Obama-faithful becoming as fanatical as the Bush-faithful once were?

Birthers and Grandmotherers are, I would agree, somewhat similar in that they so distrust the opposition that they see conspiracy wherever there is the possibility to see it. It's human nature... and, as you pretty well established in your OP, Democrats really are "No better or worse than" Republicans... in their basic human dignity and value as human beings (as, obviously, measured in their willingness to accept/reject birther/grandparenter arguments about "the enemy")

I think you're on to something cali... I think all people suck, Democrat and Republican alike... and I suspect that it is that realization that people suck which has propelled Obama to make such startling compromises with the Republicans... because, I believe, Obama has come to the realization that people all suck, as you so ably demonstrate with your OP, but corporations, while they may be "citizens" or "individuals", will never be 'people'... and so they can never suck as much as people... and, I firmly believe, that is why Obama has decided to move toward more and more "Right" positions.

He wants to protect people from "people" who suck... birthers and the like, by turning over the mechanisms of protection to corporations who, I believe Obama has concluded, don't suck like people do.

Those of us who are also opposed to "people" need to fall in line and support Obama, so he can fight the "startlingly similar" 'people' from each side of the political divide with the only army available to fight both... the corporate armies.

72. It is a logical fallacy to equate them. Each story stands or falls on its own.

Just because one story is bullshit doesn't mean the other is.

That said: I haven't looked into the evidence of the Palin story at all, so I really have no opinion on the truth or falsehood of it.

But I do think that there are methods, other than DNA evidence, with which one could make a plausible case for the scenario. Analysing photographs, timeframes, etc. can go a long way. Criminal justice has only recently started to use DNA, and did a reasonable job regardless, in the past, based on whitness accounts, fotografs, and so on, so I do not see why the same methods could not be applied here.

Sometimes you are right, and sometimes you are wrong (like now in my opinion), and that's fine. The trouble is you are just so bloody SURE of your opinions. There is no point in engaging you, ever, because to disagree with you means to invite your arrogant derision.

These two things are not the same. There is ample evidence that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii; there is no evidence of any kind that Sarah Palin gave birth to that child. Only a crudely crafted story, with holes in it you could steer the CVN George W. Bush through. I don't give a rat's ass frankly, such as Ms. Palin have been full of shit since times unrecorded, but your post targets those who for whatever reason see through her facade, not Palin herself. In fact you equate them with Teabaggers, which is nonsense of the highest order.

If you want to disagree with people who believe Sarah Palin is lying about this, or argue that it's better not to care, fine. Equating it with teabagger fantasies however is just offensive. Perhaps that's the intent, I don't know. If so carry on smartly I suppose.

is her refusal to abandon logic and reason. Nor will she ignore relevant facts. She use to patiently explain her point of view to anybody and everybody. All it ever got her were personal attacks, and they often came in pile ons. Her elbows have become rather sharp as a result of this.

FYI - teabaggers and birthers are not the same thing. Tweety is a birther. I wouldn't call him a bagger.

is that it implies that the finer details of politicians' private lives are key to their right to office; that the media and political opponents should have a right to hound them about this; and that concealing things from such people (not saying that she did or didn't) is equivalent to perjury. It reminds me not so much of the birthers, as of the impeachment of Bill Clinton over a blow-job.

We already know that Palin's daughter had an unwanted teenage pregnancy, despite the 'abstinence-only' views of her mother. I don't see that the current allegation does more to bring these attitudes into question than what is already on record.

Because Palin is such a vile person in so many ways (I now use the term 'Palinism' for any sort of vicious religious-right agenda anywhere), it is difficult to sympathize with her when people go after *her* private life. But what is done to Palin can and will be done to others. What about the time when it was Clinton? What about Joe or Jane Bloggs, who might have been an excellent politician but will never run for office because they don't want to face having everything about their own or their families' personal lives dissected by opponents or sensational journalists? What about the public, whose lives come to depend more and more on leaders chosen for what they do or don't do about sex, rather than for their competence or policies?

89. So some here are trying to make the birther stuff all about bigotry...

in order to justify their odd interest in who gave birth to Trig...

I just wonder how it would be if things were changed around just a little.

Just for the hell of it, let's pretend that Palin is a black Democrat and Obama is a white Republican.

Obama's dad was born in Sweden and his mom was born in America. Everything else is the same except he's white and a Republican. I'll bet anything the same people jumping up and down in rage over the Republicans and the birther issue would be dogging Obama for not producing a birth certificate. Because, you know, he's Republican.

Then there would be Sarah Palin. She's a Democrat. She's black. If the Republicans were going after her trying to prove Trig is really her daughter's son, I can just imagine the shit storm here. People accusing those Republicans of being "racist", implying that just because the Palin family is black, there has to be some back story involving black teen pregnancy, etc. etc.

Or, let's pretend that both Palin and Obama are white. Or that they're both black.

Then the playing field is even except for....

One is Republican, one is Democrat.

So this really doesn't have anything to do with whatever excuses people want to find for dogging on someone ONLY because of their political party.

We're supposed to be smarter than that here. Not as hypocritical as the "morans" over on the-site-which-shall-not-be-named.

Your examples are fictions, so you can make up whatever you like. That's convenient, since reality doesn't support your argument. I say past history shows that the Democratic black woman would get the treatment you say; the Republican white man would never.

If a white Republican had a Swedish parent and a missing birth certificate (not the case with Obama, by the way), it would be absolutely no issue whatsoever for either the left or Democrats. It's not the kind of thing that gets them excited, for one thing. However, I cannot know this for sure, since your example is fictional. With fiction, we each get to write the ending we prefer. I merely find yours absurd. You can't find a real example that fits your scenario, which is why I think you made one up.

Now, in real life, I can point to a lot of cases where Americans with darker skin or non-European ethnicity were rendered into foreigners or insinuated as foreign-influenced by right-wing propaganda. This has even happened to Irish, Jews and Italians, the last not so long ago (Ferraro).

then so is the insistence, by some, that Trig could not possibly be SP's child because of certain "facts" which are only apparent to the people who truly want to believe she lied.

Or that the birther issue exists because of rampant racism in the minds of those who perpetuate the issue. No proof. Just opinions from people who can't be more imaginative in their search for reasons why anyone would care where Obama was born.

I see it a lot here. If the person in question is other than white, then it's got to be "racism". People who don't like Obama...well, they're all racists. There can't possibly be any other reason for their dislike.

Of course my scenario isn't real. What I was hoping for was that someone would be a tad bit honest and admit that, yes, perhaps there would be a different opinion on whether SP has the right to privacy in the matter of her son, Trig. I still maintain that if it were a Democrat woman this was happening with, even if she weren't black, people here would be going bullshit over Republican attempts to "prove" that a child is not hers.

In other words, it seems like many here are willing to do unto others what they would not want done to them (or the politicians/Party they support) and then give some really lame justifications for why it's OK.

which is the bread and butter of rightwing radio/media. Take two totally different issues and declare them equal. Evolution is equal to intelligent design. Why? Because we say so - no facts required. Global warming science is equal to oil co. paid for "science" - even though it isn't.

The so-called "liberal media" will gleefully put Trump on and let him spew his bullshit about Obama and his birth certificate - while the "liberal media" simply took Palin at her word and let the story be declared a conspiracy theory without actually digging into it. Those who DID look into it, hit brick walls at every turn.

Anyway, whatever. I'm done playing by these rules. It's time to fight fire with fire and expose this liar before she has a chance to win the presidency. Trig is not her child. Plain and simple.

102. I have to say that I really don't care if Ms. Palin gave birth to Trig

or if Ms. Palin's daughter gave birth to Trig. What matters is that Ms. Palin claimed him as her son. Having done that she is responsible for him and from what I have seen, I don't believe his best interests are being met. When her cable show was on, my husband and I would catch parts of it. Whenever Trig was shown, it seemed to me that his Down Syndrome was on the moderate to severe side of the range rather then mild to moderate. Yet there was no evidence that he was being provided with early interventional therapy. If that is the case, Ms. Palin is not providing the care that Trig needs. I hope that I am wrong.

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.